The High Court of Kerala dismissed an application for anticipatory bail filed by an accused charged under section 4 of the Explosive Substances Act. The court held that the serious nature of the offence and the necessity for custodial interrogation precluded the grant of bail.
The Bail Application is accordingly dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD JUNE 2009 / 13TH JYAISHTA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 1917 of 2009() ------------------------------------CRIME NO.316/2008 OF DHARMADOM POLICE STATION PETITIONER/ACCUSED: -----------------------------------VIPIN, S/O.LATE RAHULAN, AGED 28 YEARS, SOBHA HOUSE, USK ROAD, DHARMADOM AMSOM, DHARMADOM DESOM.
BY ADV. SRI.S.RAJEEV
RESPONDENT/ STATE: -------------------------------STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLICL PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM (CRIME NO.316 OF 2008 OF DHARMADOM POLICE STATION).
SRI. K.S. SIVAKUAMR,PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
K.T. SANKARAN, J.
B.A. No.1917 of 2009
Dated this the 3rd day of June, 2009
O R D E R
This is an application for anticipatory bail under section 438 of the code of criminal procedure. The petitioner is the
accused in Crime No. 316/2008 of Dharmadom Police Station.
B.A. No.1917 of 2009
2
were recovered is close to the residential building of the petitioner, though that portion of the land may be included in the property of Premachandran. The residential building of Premachandran is on the northern side of the house of the petitioner. The offence is of serious nature. In the nature of the offence and other circumstances, custodial interrogation would be necessary. If the petitioner is granted anticipatory bail, it would affect the proper and smooth investigation of the case.
inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
The Bail Application is accordingly dismissed.
K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE
scm
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted under section 438 of CrPC in a case involving serious charges under the Explosive Substances Act.
Whether custodial interrogation is necessary due to the serious nature of the offence and proximity of the crime scene.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
VIPIN
STATE OF KERALA
K.T. SANKARAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
